Civil War in Ukraine

Kindly translated by Anne-Marie de Grazia
The events in Eastern Ukraine since May 25th have sadly
proven right those who predicted the unleashing of a civil war. Not a
day goes by without very sad and disturbing news about events in these
regions, without the news of deaths either among the insurgents and the
civilian population – which is paying a heavy tribute – or among the
Kiev government forces. The use by the Kiev government of important
military means, of combat helicopters, of jets bombing the city of
Slaviansk on June 2nd[1], as well as of artillery rocket launchers is particularly noteworthy. This had been confirmed by the OSCE[2].
Three years ago, Western governments – the French government among them
– had shown dismay over the use of this type of weapons in the civil
war in Syria. Somewhat earlier, during the civil war in Libya, the
argument of the massacre of civilian populations had been used to
justify what one cannot but call a military intervention. One is struck
to note the deafening silence of these same governments when the Kiev
government is using exactly the same military power against the
insurgents. And one cannot help thinking that there exists indeed a
double standard according to which the lives and the destinies of the
ones are measured against the others. The hatred of all that is Russian
and all that comes from Russia is sufficiently blinding part of the
press and of French intellectuals, with the exception of Emmanuel Todd [3], that there is no need to wonder much about this deafening silence of the “beautiful souls.”

The Presidential election of May 25th, which has seen the election of
Mr Porochenko in the first round, has not brought about, again
according to expectations, any amelioration in the situation. Mr
Porochenko has been elected in the West and in the central part of the
country. His legitimacy is to remain questionable. He might be able to
rebuild it if he decides to open an immediate dialogue with the
insurgents and above all to put an immediate halt to military
operations. For it must be pointed out that the insurgents have risen against the Kiev government but not necessarily against
Ukraine. Discussions with people representing the “Republic of
Donbass,” from Donetsk and Slaviansk, showed until these past two weeks
the existence of a strong resentment against the provisory government,
but also an acceptation in principle of a participation in Ukraine. The
demands of the populations of Eastern Ukraine, be they linguistic or
cultural, do not appear unreasonable [4].
Their demand for a « federalisation » of Ukraine should have been, and
should still be listened to. But the violence of combats tearing up the
regions of Donetsk and Slaviansk, the fear settling over Odessa, which
is prey to the actions of militants of the extreme-right, are in the
process of swinging over part of the inhabitants to real separatism, and
to the idea that the only solution for them resides in union with
Russia.

The readers of this carnet know that I have since the beginning of
this crisis defended the thesis of the unity of Ukraine, because it was
the solution, which appeared to me politically most adequate. A scission
of the country would provoke chain reactions in the region as well as
within the European Union, which would find itself saddled with the
responsibility of managing a rump Ukraine, reduced to its Western and
Central regions. It is also to be feared that, in such a situation, the
inhabitants of Lviv (L’vov) would ask for their unification with Poland.
Only a federalisation of Ukraine could keep such a process in check.
But it requires that the arms go silent and that the Kiev government
accept to negotiate with the insurgents. Such is the reality of History:
one rarely negotiates with one’s friends! Otherwise, it’s the very
existence of Ukraine, which risks to be called into question.